Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

Why isn't Marion Barber getting 90% of the carries


Locness_Monster
 Share

Recommended Posts

You can tell Barber was ineffective at nursing & grinding when he only got 8 carries all game, never lost yardage, made a superb run to save DAL from a safety, and half of his runs were for 4 yds or more?

 

Barber was ineffective at nursing and grinding because they started nursing and grinding with him in the second half with a three point lead and ended up losing by 21. How much more ineffective can nursing and grinding be than to be -24 points? I'm not sure why I'm supposed to believe the Cowboys would have faired any better by trying to grind it out with Barber for an entire game starting from even when they were unable to even do it for a half with three extra points.

 

The question was why isn't Barber getting 90% of the carries. The answer is that unless completely outmatched, the Cowboys are able to be 5-0 with him getting a little over 50% of the carries. If the question is for 2008 pick only one I take Barber but for 2007 I don't see any reason to give him carries just for the sake of him touching the ball more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 108
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Barber was ineffective at nursing and grinding because they started nursing and grinding with him in the second half with a three point lead and ended up losing by 21. How much more ineffective can nursing and grinding be than to be -24 points?

 

Okay, so 2 carries on a drive after DAL gets a lead, one of which goes for 17 yds, is a failure by Barber to "nurse and grind", and that those 2 carries being a failure on Barber's part turned a 3 pt lead into a 21 point deficit?

 

You have to be reaching into a sarcasm bag to produce your material. You can't expect to be taken seriously when you post this kind of stuff, can you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't matter what fantasy footballers think or want ... the offensive scheme they are using right now that employs BOTH running backs has produced the 2nd most points in the NFL.

 

Explain to me again why Phillips/Garrett wants to change this formula?

I'm just throwing this out there because I see this response all the time. And actually, I'm not necessarily focusing on MBIII/JJ... the same observation is true for other RBBC situations like Foster/DW and FT/MJD. However, for argument's sake, forget what you know about LT and how he's performed as a featured back: I'm curious how you think a tandom like Tomlinson/Turner would perform splitting carries? I'd say SD would absolutely be a top-10 rushing team, perhaps slightly less productive than using LT as a featured back. That said, would the mere fact that such a tandem proved to be successful, in of itself, dictate that San Diego is definitively better off sharing carries than feeding LT the ball as a featured RB? I'd argue that many NFL teams could be successful splitting carries among RBs, but in the end most choose to give the ball to the more productive player. For some reason, Dallas chooses not to, and no one really knows how that may be impacting them negatively. IMHO there's no basis to believe they wouldn't be equally successful, or moreso, giving the more productive player more carries. They could in fact be setting themselves back by giving JJ 10-15 carries at 3.9 YPC, despite their relative success considering that sandbag.

 

So yeah, maintaining status quo could be a productive move. Maybe its not the best move, however.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did anyone watch the MIN-DAL game yesterday?

 

J. Jones ran like he had a vagina. Period. End of story.

 

M. Barber was the first RB to score a rushing TD vs. the Vikings this year, and with another minute, would have punched in #2.

THATS IT!! JJ has Rosie O'Donnell control over the coaches :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's just incredibly curious that the DAL coaching staff can't see what is so plainly evident to others - and their jobs are on the line. The only thing I can possibly use to explain the nonsense of starting Jones & using him so much is that they have gotten a mandate from Jerry Jones that Jones will continue to get used this way no matter what the outcome. Jerry Jones has shwon before that he isn't much of a football guy, so maybe this is just further proof of such.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's just incredibly curious that the DAL coaching staff can't see what is so plainly evident to others - and their jobs are on the line. The only thing I can possibly use to explain the nonsense of starting Jones & using him so much is that they have gotten a mandate from Jerry Jones that Jones will continue to get used this way no matter what the outcome. Jerry Jones has shwon before that he isn't much of a football guy, so maybe this is just further proof of such.

 

Nah, it's the system, it's successful. Jones is too good to keep on the bench. MBIII only does good cause JJ wears them down :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's just incredibly curious that the DAL coaching staff can't see what is so plainly evident to others - and their jobs are on the line. The only thing I can possibly use to explain the nonsense of starting Jones & using him so much is that they have gotten a mandate from Jerry Jones that Jones will continue to get used this way no matter what the outcome. Jerry Jones has shwon before that he isn't much of a football guy, so maybe this is just further proof of such.

 

:D

 

Yeah ... at 6-1 the coaching staff is feeling real pressure that they might lose their jobs ... :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:D

 

Yeah ... at 6-1 the coaching staff is feeling real pressure that they might lose their jobs ... :D

 

When your job is on the line - and theoretically, every coach's job is every year - you put your best players on the field and then you find a way to give them opportunities to make plays.

 

Don't overlook the fact that DAL got extended by a weak BUF team, got their asses kicked by NE when they refused to run the football, and a MIN team that has no legit passing game & a secondary almost as bad could have easily beaten them without a bad mistake with the game tied.

 

Oh - and didn't Phillips come from a team that fired its HC despite going 14-2?

Edited by Bronco Billy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information